News

King of the world, see Oscar again

  At the end of every year and the beginning of the year, the Oscars come as scheduled, and this year is no exception. As a result, the world movie scene is once again turbulent. Compared with the three major international film festivals in Europe, including Venice (founded in 1932), Cannes (founded in 1946), and Berlin (founded in 1951), the Oscar, founded in 1929, is the oldest film award. This annual film event has witnessed the evolution of Hollywood film history and its ups and downs. Through the brilliant stars on the Oscar red carpet, it is undoubtedly the actual performance of the Hollywood film industry and its increasingly strong cultural radiation. . How can an American domestic award be so touching. After careful analysis, it is not difficult to find that its core motivation is that it represents the world influence of Hollywood, the entertainment and media dynasty. As the center of the world’s film entertainment rights, it determines the location of its entertainment vane.
  
  The “war” of two people
  
  2009 is not a big year for Hollywood. Although there are many good films, most of them are too mediocre. This year’s Best Picture nominations have expanded from five to ten. It seems more intense, but the strength is obvious. These two equally excellent films attract everyone’s attention with their different postures and momentum. The two heroes of “Avatar” and “The Hurt Locker” have formed a clear pattern of slaying the dragon against the sky. As a result, this Oscar has almost evolved into a “war” between two people. The “King of the World” James Cameron and his ex-wife Catherine Bigelow have become the focus of this year’s Oscars. The previous Oscar nominations were also quite a twist. Just as the world’s fans cheered for “Avatar”, a dark horse stabbed out diagonally, and this is “The Hurt Locker”, which has always been low-key. At the end of the year, the film began to explode with flamboyance and received special treatment from film critics. In particular, the three major film critics associations in the United States: the New York Film Critics Association, the Los Angeles Film Critics Association and the National Film Critics Association have all awarded it the Best Film Award. For the first time in more than a decade, the three major film critics’ associations have agreed on a literary film, and only “Goodfellas”, “Schindler’s List” and “L.A. Confidential” have received such treatment before. The final result of the Oscars is that “The Hurt Locker” won six awards including Best Picture, Best Director, Best Original Screenplay, Best Editing, Best Sound Effects and Best Sound Editing. And “Avatar” only won three technical awards for best photography, best art direction and best visual effects. It can be said that “big productions win small awards, and small productions win awards.” After analyzing the reasons, we found that this is closely related to Oscar’s tradition and social reality, political situation, cultural trends and other aspects, and it is the result of the balance of these factors.
  
  The Creation of the Film Academy and the Origin of the “Oscar”
  
  The idea of ​​establishing a film school was first proposed by Louis Mayer, then president of MGM. Its original impetus came from a major alliance in the film industry in November 1926, when nine major film companies and five film associations signed the “Film Production Wage Base Contract”. But this contract only involves workers in the field of film technology, and directors, actors and playwrights are not included. Meyer decided to set up an academy that would bring together the best of the film industry, including the best on-stage and behind-the-scenes crews. He proposed that the members of the academy should be “persons who have made outstanding contributions to the art of cinema or the technology of cinema.” On May 4, 1927, the academy officially became a legal organization and was named the “School of Cinematic Arts and Sciences.” Its purpose is to “promote the development of film art and technology, and promote the interaction and cooperation between various fields of the film industry, with a view to realizing the progress of culture, education and science and technology”. The Academy Award selection adopts an annual system, and each session selects the works and individuals of the previous year. There are several sub-awards under the award, and their divisions are detailed and numerous, ranking first among all film awards in the world. The most notable of these are the Best Picture Award, the Best Director Award, four Actor Awards (Best Actor/Actress, Best Supporting Actor), and two Writing Awards (Best Original Screenplay and Adapted Screenplay). Several awards.
  The Oscars are synonymous with Academy Awards. The earliest use of the alias “Oscar” was at an awards dinner in 1934. There is still controversy over its origin. A more credible account is recorded when Margaret Herrick, the executive secretary of the Film Academy, who was a librarian, described her first day at work: One morning in 1931, she After taking a closer look at the statuette, he exclaimed: “Ah! He really looks like my Uncle Oscar!” Columnist Sidney Sigles, who was also present, wrote in a subsequent report. : “The staff of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences affectionately call their golden statue the Oscar.” This alias spread like wildfire and continues to this day. The Oscars and Social Reality
  Throughout the history of the Oscars, it is like an asymptote of social reality, changing over time. Each selection is not only a summary of the performance of American films in the previous year, but also indicates the trend of film development in the coming year, and at the same time shows the evolution of film types, genres and technological progress under the influence of social reality and public interest. It can be said that the history of the 82nd Academy Awards is a microcosm of the development of American films for more than 80 years.
  From the late 1920s to the early 1940s, the United States experienced social stability and economic development. This period is the golden stage of American film, ‘the film is rich in themes and styles. For example, “Wings”, “Ambition”, “All Quiet on the Western Front”, “Broadway Melody”, “Zola Biography” and so on have all won the Oscar for Best Picture. Then, the Pacific War broke out, and Hollywood entered the wartime system. “Mrs. Minivor” and “Casablanca” were very timely and played a certain role in inspiring the military and people’s hearts at that time. From the late 1940s to the early 1950s, McCarthyism and non-American activities were rampant, and many Hollywood directors avoided reality and were keen to shoot musical films, resulting in “An American in Paris” and so on. In the mid-1950s, American films began to face reality and expose the dark side of society. “On the Riverside” and “Marty” both won the Academy Award for Best Picture, not only bringing a realistic style to the American screen, but also promoting the development of non-Hollywood institutional films. After that, the US economy recovered, which stimulated Hollywood to shoot prosperous blockbusters. “Kiki”, “Ben-Hur”, “My Fair Lady” and “West Side Story” with spectacular scenes and gorgeous costumes won the championship one after another. Since the mid-1960s, due to the intensification of social conflicts in the United States, films such as “Midnight Cowboy”, “French Drug Network”, “The Godfather”, “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” and other social films and police and gangster films have all entered the Oscars. of the podium. This marked the evolution of the general style of American cinema from romanticism to realism. In the 1980s, the family crisis in the United States became more and more serious, and films such as “Mrs. Kramers” and “Mother-Daughter Love” won awards because of the current situation. Since then, the U.S. economy has continued to develop, the film industry has become increasingly prosperous, and the themes and genres have become more diversified. “Schindler’s List” and other awards have been awarded. In the late 1990s, at the turn of the century, nostalgia prevailed, and works such as Forrest Gump, which praised American values, appeared. At this time, American film technology has made rapid progress, and the luxury giant “Titanic” was born and won nine Oscars in one fell swoop. After the “9.11” incident, the entire American society suffered a great impact. On the one hand, the U.S. national strategy has entered the “anti-terrorism period”, and on the other hand, the American public has begun to reflect on the U.S. national policy and cultural tendencies since the Cold War. In this context, we can clearly see the change in the direction of Hollywood film creation in recent years. Not only the innovation of simple technological means and audio-visual effects, but also the adjustment of deeper political attitudes. So, we saw that a new weather vane appeared in the Oscars. Returning to reality, films that touch on the dark side of society and human nature are gradually attracting people’s attention. Since 2004, the Oscars have awarded the best picture to “Million Dollar Baby”, “Crash” and “The Departed”, “Slumdog Millionaire” and other films. Famed film historian David Thomson put it this way: “These are bloody, grim times, and the real world is brutal. That’s why torture and abuse entered the entertainment industry in a serious way. A sense of authenticity that resonates with the audience.”
  
  Oscar’s political leanings
  
  Every film award, whether it’s the world’s top 11 A-level film festivals, or the United States

numerous film awards, film critic awards and trade union awards each have their own characteristics, preferences and rules. Especially like the Oscars, which has lasted for more than 80 years and was voted by nearly 6,000 people, its selection is like a huge project. It took three months from registration, nomination to announcement. . In addition to the different ideological tendencies and voting trends of nearly 6,000 voters for the Oscars, so many aspects are combined to finally select the winning film. The book “Oscars” wrote: “Historical and political factors have always had an important impact on whether those films and performances won. In other words, social environment and political situation are more important than film quality. Determine whether or not to win.”
  Indeed, the style of Oscar-nominated and winning films has always been influenced by historical and political factors. Most film artists think the Oscars should stay out of politics. But in practice, such separation is simply impossible, because the film itself is a political medium. In the Oscar race, historical and political factors always influence the genre and expressiveness of a film. In other words, in determining the attribution of the Oscars, the social environment, zeitgeist and themes are more important than the artistic content of the film itself. From the first year of the Academy Awards, the ideological aspects of the film have been included in the consideration of awards. The film “All Quiet on the Western Front” won the double victory of the film critics and the box office, and won the Oscar for the best picture in one fell swoop. There is also the 1937 Oscar for the best picture “Zola Biography”, which is widely sought after for its outstanding morality and good taste. Some political movements will also affect the film industry. The history of American films has suffered relatively serious political persecution. It occurred in the early 1950s when Senator Joseph McCarthy censored Hollywood. This is the “McCarthyism” that shocked the world. In such a terrifying atmosphere, Hollywood’s creation has almost gone to an extreme – most films that have nothing to do with politics are favored. Most of the winning films of those years were light-hearted escapist films, not political ones. The best picture of 1952 is arguably the best footnote, with the circus adventure drama “The King of Dramas” bizarrely overwhelming the Western psychological film “High Noon.” Much of the latter’s failure was political, rather than its artistic merit. Many critics felt that “High Noon” was an insinuation of American foreign policy in the Korean War, which clearly involved 1950s politics. 1982’s “Gandhi” took home almost every Oscar because Gandhi’s character was so inspiring and his anti-violence rhetoric was so relevant to the 1980s that the judges voted for it to win, Instead of Steven Spielberg’s “Alien” and Sidney Rumant’s “The Great Judgment.” In the 2001 Oscar competition, the jury chose the inspiring and positive “A Beautiful Mind”. Another ambitious and technically innovative film “The Lord of the Rings” missed the trophy. This shows that the members of the jury prefer “serious” films that reflect important “issues”. Oscar’s picks are always safe, mainstream, non-controversial films with widely accepted values.
  
  Oscar’s Cultural Interest
  
  Regarding the Oscars, Leroy Johnston once commented: “The Oscars are the Nobel Prizes in the film industry.” The annual Academy Awards are the highest-level awards in the world’s film industry and are global event. It’s common to see the Oscars as a cultural icon. In mainstream American culture, the Oscars have become a prominent symbol of success and achievement. The audience can roughly see the microcosm of American film, American television, American culture and American society from the film. In any case, this function of the Oscars has contributed to the formation of an American cultural dominance around the world. The Oscars and the Oscars are effective propaganda for American cinema, American capitalism, and the American way of life. After more than eighty years of development and evolution, the Oscars have become a longstanding ritual in American culture. Like religious rituals, it affirms core values ​​in mainstream American culture again and again. The Oscars embody such basic American values: democracy, equality, individualism, competition, hard work, professional achievement and financial success. And each awards ceremony showcases the current trends, morals, sense of humor, political leanings—in short, the zeitgeist. Today, the Oscars have become a top-notch TV show and a global media event. The Oscar party has long since become an inseparable part of American culture, a symbolic cultural ceremony with many years of tradition. The primacy of the Oscars, both in Hollywood and in the international film industry, is unquestionable.
  
  Unexpected, Reasonable
  
  Science fiction is a genre rarely favored by the Oscars, and the Academy’s judges have been shunning it. This can be found in many precedents in the history of Oscar. In 1968, Stanley Kubrick directed “2001 A Space Odyssey” with its eye-catching visual language, which was deeply groundbreaking. But the film ultimately lost out to Carol Reed’s Oliver Twist; in 1977, Star Wars was definitely a groundbreaking film at the time, but it still lost in the competition for best picture It was given to Woody Allen’s small production “Annie Hall”; in 1982, “Alien” rewrote the box office record in the history of American film, but it was finally defeated by the celebrity biopic “Gandhi”, and the most A good movie was missed.
  ”Avatar” transforms the dust-like technical advantages into wild visual expression, attracting countless people to succumb. ‘The global box office record of 2.5 billion US dollars represents its wide audience base and high popularity, and its own leadership of the future development trend of 3D movies, innovation and development of visual effects technology have been unanimous in the industry. affim. However, movies are not just visual art. For Oscar, which belongs to the Academy Award, more important than technology is textual content and meaning, which is exactly what “Avatar” lacks. The unobstructed view of the plot and the lack of live-action performance due to the extensive use of C6I technology are indeed its obvious weaknesses. In contrast, it is reasonable for the serious drama, anti-war theme, and comprehensive “The Hurt Locker” to win “Avatar”.
  The theme and type alone cannot determine the final attribution of the award. The strength of “The Hurt Locker” itself is the key to victory. “The Hurt Locker” does not seek to win by outrageously different, but in a plain, concise, rigorous and restrained way, relying on its superior control and documentary technique to interpret the complex psychology of American soldiers in the Iraq War and the current United States The long-running anti-war sentiments coincide, making the film more of a microcosm of an era. The whole film is calm and restrained, asking calmly, the cruelty of war and the suffering of life blow through the camera. The film uses the US military stationed in Iraq to defuse bombs as a clue, and declares the anti-war theme through rough but very real pictures. The director is impeccable in the control of the scene and rhythm. With her skillful and light-lifting techniques and her precise grasp of the atmosphere of the times, she presents us a battlefield without gunpowder smoke and a silent confrontation and contest between light and dark sides. This heavy work tells the story of men in war with a realistic picture that washes away the splendor. Tell people the fact that even hell needs heroes. At the same time, the film also reflects the poor and tragic life of the local Iraqi people. The street in the camera is full of dilapidated atmosphere and garbage. The desolation, sadness and despair that pervade it are all deeply impregnated with the artist’s true humanitarianism. With the help of the power of images, the creator presents the respect for individual life and the spiritual spark from the bottom line of human nature. The moving part of the film is that it not only reflects the darkness and cruelty of social reality, but also does not give up the ideal and belief in such cruelty. It reminds every viewer that although this world is cruel beyond people’s imagination, there are still many things worthy of our persistence and pursuit. “The Hurt Locker” shows the pain of the Iraq War in a timely manner, so in terms of the artistic level and practical significance of the film, it is indeed better than “Avatar”.
  
  make history
  
  The 82nd Academy Awards ceremony has already ended. Although the process is lackluster, we still clearly remember that exciting moment: when the best director award guest Barbra Streisand saw the final list of winners, she said: “Historic moment It’s here!” The moment was truly exciting. Catherine Bigelow’s award has created more than one Oscar record. First, with the low-cost independent production of “The Hurt Locker”, it defeated the highest-grossing film “Avatar” in history and became the film with the lowest production cost in 20 years. ; Second, she was promoted to the Best Director Oscar as a woman. Such an honor is an unprecedented breakthrough in the development process of Oscar for more than 80 years. Looking back at the Oscars, three women have previously been nominated for best director: Lena Vimura (“Seven Beauties”) in 1976, and Jane Campion (“Piano Lesson” in 1993). ) and Sofia Coppola (“Lost in Translation”) in 2003, and now Catherine Bigelow’s best director crown after being nominated is truly a historic moment.
  The Oscars in 2010 were more lively than expected. After “Avatar” led the historic box office climax, “The Hurt Locker” was well-received and was elected with high votes, drawing a successful end to this legendary year. The Oscars have grasped the balance between commercial films and art films in a timely manner, and this is the key to the comprehensive and steady development of Hollywood films. Looking at the major film awards at home and abroad, only Oscar can play such a precise role in regulation. I sincerely hope that the Oscars in the future can face the world with a more generous modern mind and style, and meet a brighter tomorrow. For this, we will wait and see.

error: Content is protected !!